Please note: we have been online over ten years, and we want The Trek BBS to continue as a free site. But if you block our ads we are at risk.Please consider unblocking ads for this site - every ad you view counts and helps us pay for the bandwidth that you are using. Thank you for your understanding.

Welcome! The Trek BBS is the number one place to chat about Star Trek with like-minded fans. Please login to see our full range of forums as well as the ability to send and receive private messages, track your favourite topics and of course join in the discussions.

If you are a new visitor, join us for free. If you are an existing member please login below. Note: for members who joined under our old messageboard system, please login with your display name not your login name.

Yes. And a fictional non-entity called him a "baby killer" without being refuted.

Does the statement stand? Why or why not?

Without knowing that soldier's full history I won't make that guess.

You don't have to guess. Argument from assertion is not evidence and neither is lack of refutation.

I do have to guess. You only present two sentences about this soldier. With Star Trek we do have the episodes to draw from which tells us when Starfleet was and was not a Military. Just like when you say that he is a soldier.

Crazy Eddie wrote:

Is still not a confirmation.

You say not a confirmation, Carol Marcus says Military = Starfleet.

Crazy Eddie wrote:

Partially true: the submarine service records data collected by their sensors during normal operations. This is made available to civilian researchers IF AND WHEN the mission is concluded and declassified. Attack submarines are actually very poorly equipped for that type of data collection and most of that data is used in navigational studies in the absence of more detailed observations from specialized exploration vessels.

And what is the difference between the Defiant making their collected data available to Federation civilian researchers with classified access and/or military researchers in Starfleet?

Crazy Eddie wrote:

No, because Starfleet officers are not civilians, nor do
civilians make up the majority contingent of their crews. NOAA vessels include civilians among their research staff but are OPERATED by a uniformed service of the Federal Government.

David Marcus was a civilian that accompanied the scientific mission to Genesis on a Starfleet vessel. The Marcus' and their whole civilian science team were working on a classified project for Starfleet. Civilians working for Starfleet, the military, as the scientists referred to.

Crazy Eddie wrote:

In contrast with Starfleet, which is a research fleet that conducts war.

How does that description not describe a military if it conducts war?

Crazy Eddie wrote:

Probably the same reason Ben Sisko acknowledges being the Emissary of the Prophets: it's a role he has taken and accepted due to circumstances beyond his control. Even so, Starfleet is hardly a branch of the Bajoran Priesthood.

So Starfleet drafted O'Brien and Nog like a military and they're serving as soldiers? Gotcha.

Crazy Eddie wrote:

Why would anyone else need to?

Because if no one fights the invaders then the Federation falls. Are you arguing now that no military fought for the Federation and that they didn't contribute military forces along with the Klingons and Romulans?

Or that Sisko's plea with the Federation President that the Dominion doesn't discriminate between military and civilian targets makes no sense because there is no military?

Crazy Eddie wrote:

I'm being as accurate as I can be based on the information available. It's just that "a group of people who participate in a war" is not the same thing as "a military."

The Organians identified Kirk and the Enterprise as Military Forces. Carol Marcus identified Starfleet as The Military.

Crazy Eddie wrote:

Ironically, this was VERY MUCH the case during the years in which naval forces were the foremost leaders in the exploration of the world's oceans;

Naval forces, huh? Military.

Crazy Eddie wrote:

privateers, mercenaries, rebel bands and wandering psychopaths were just as likely to end up on the firing line as career soldiers. Indeed, the army rank "Private" originates from the old English practice where a larger number of soldiers who signed on for battle were in fact "private soldiers" who showed up to fight purely because the Crown offered to pay them for their troubles; throughout the fifteenth, sixteenth and seventeenth centuries, the MAJORITY of soldiers found on Europe's battlefields were, in fact, mercenaries.

Which fought as "soldiers" in a "military".

Crazy Eddie wrote:

The nature of warfare and those who fight it has been in flux for centuries and new technologies are already threatening to unravel conventional notions of military vs. civilian targets. This for a planet like ours where we customarily go out of our way to define the difference. The Federation exists in a universe where many aggressive species make no such distinction or -- in the case of, for example, the Borg and the Dominion -- where such a distinction is logically impossible. There are advanced civilizations like the Organians, the Metrons, the Paxans, the Aldeans and even the Prophets that are fully capable of defending themselves against aggressors without having anything that even RESEMBLES a military organization. The Aldeans, in particular, can repel invading forces with the mere touch of a button, and Minosian weapon technology was so powerful their entire species was obliterated just for want of an "off" button.

Well, since the Federation isn't at that level, they still use a military to fight their wars.

Crazy Eddie wrote:

Moreover, the Federation faces day-to-day threats from non-military sources: carnivorous space creatures with peculiar abilities, enigmatic alien robots with immense destructive power, natural disasters that can wipe out entire solar systems, sociopathic demigods with an axe to grind, temporal anomalies that screw up reality itself, and all kinds of other weirdness that could never reasonably be confused with "military" forces that nonetheless possess the ability to destroy entire worlds.

Which as others have pointed out are only part of the makeup of adversaries Starfleet might face. You forget the conventional military forces of the other star nations.

Crazy Eddie wrote:

I've said it before, and I'll say again now: when a hyper-intelligent thunderstorm sends an email threatening to blow away your capital city, you'd probably want to call NOAA, not the Navy.

No. You'd call the USAF's Cyber Command to put together a worm to disable the thunderstorm. Then the Army, Navy and National Guard to cordon off the waters and land that the thunderstorm threatens and help with the evacuation. NOAA will assist with forecasting where it might show up. And the USAF if it has to deliver a special nuke into the heart of the storm.

And only if all else fails, Jeff Goldblum to hack into the storm's network.

Crazy Eddie wrote:

And if you live in a country that is attacked by hyper-intelligent storm clouds slightly more often than it is by other people, the NOAA might as well BE the navy.

If NOAA was armed, I agree. Again, since it is not but the US Navy is, well I side with the Military.

But really, how hard is it to consider that Starfleet during it's hundred plus years of operation be able to change as necessary from a military to a non-military organization as the need arises?

A governmental research fleet that conducts war (and conducts war as the main combatant, not just in some sort of supporting capacity) is a military. At least a de facto military.

Which is why, LEGALLY, Starfleet would be equivalent to the JMSDF even though OPERATIONALLY it is managed as a NOAA-style exploration fleet most of the time.

So you do agree Starfleet is at least de facto a military?

Absolutely, although I think the term we're looking for is paramilitary.

But the Federation has no separate institutions. It has just one institution, Starfleet, that is tasked both with exploration and fighting wars. You could easily reverse everything you said - at a certain point you have to ask whether fighting wars is something an exploration organization should do?

Which is why I don't believe that Starfleet has principal responsibility for the Federation's ground wars (seeing how it is, you know Starfleet, not Dirtfleet). This is also why I tend to believe the MACOs still exist well into the 24th century, and why I believe that "the military" is a term that refers primarily to a highly versatile land army that possesses automated systems capable of adequate space superiority missions.

Which is to say that Starfleet may actually be a much less important organization than we give it credit for; if you only had movies about the Mercury/Gemini/Apollo astronauts to go by for a snapshot of what was going in the 1960s/early 70s, you probably wouldn't even be aware of the Vietnam War or the Watergate Scanadal; you'd see Kennedy's "We choose to go to the moon" speech in "The Right Stuff" but never be aware of the Cuban missile crisis or Kennedy's assassination.

Star Trek doesn't really show us the state of affairs for the Federation except for a limited bubble around the main characters themselves; even our slightly wider angle in DS9 isn't nearly as large as we think it is, given that Sisko and company apparently fight on a battle front that revolves entirely around the Bajor/Cardassia systems.

So I'm thinking Starfleet is just a smaller piece of a much larger puzzle, and may not even be the most important piece. If nothing else, the scarcity of Andorian or Tellarite space forces in the 24th century is indicative that we are definitely NOT getting the whole story.

They could if their ships were armed, and it wouldn't take much to "up gun" a NOAA vessel to a configuration comparable to a Starfleet vessel without sacrificing its science sensors.

I sincerely doubt you could make a NOAA vessel capable of going toe-to-toe with hostile combat ships (which Starfleet ships do on a regular basis).

But leaving that aside, you failed to address the part of my post where I said that if you somehow did make NOAA combat-ready, that very thing would turn it into a military.

That depends on their legal status. The Coast Guard, for example, is only considered a branch of the military because U.S. law says it is.

Also, I'm thinking the definition of "war" in the 23rd century may also be somewhat different than the rest of us expect. For example, it seems to be the case that flying around and blowing up other people's space ships is NOT generally considered an act of war (Hence Archer does this with surprising regularity without causing a diplomatic incident). On the contrary, war is conducted exclusively for the control of PLANETS; thus, getting the Klingons to shoot down the Enterprise probably wouldn't be enough to set the Federation to war, nor would the destruction of a Klingon vessel by Kirk. But bombing the Klingon home world would definitely do the trick.

My belief, however, is that in the 23rd century, space battles are not nearly as important as one might assume. Most wars are actually fought on the ground and most fronts of those wars may never require the presence of an actual starship from either side (shuttles or long range transports are more than enough).

I can't speak about the 23rd century because we haven't seen a war in that timeframe but the Dominion War pretty clearly shows space battles are the primary way one fights a major war in the 24th century.

How sure are we about that?

Bashir's think tank apparently states that the Federation stands to loose up to a trillion lives if they aren't victorious over the Dominion. A war fought primarily in space wouldn't have those kinds of stakes; it is evident, therefore, that MOST of the fighting in this war is actually taking place in ground engagements throughout the Federation and that the space combat phase is mainly fought over strategically valuable transport routes -- e.g. the Wormhole -- through which invading armies would normally travel.

Because in the whole of American history, no one has ever said of the U.S. Navy "Our purpose is peaceful exploration," and no captain of CVN-65 was ever heard using terms similar to "The Navy is not a military organization, its purpose is exploration."

IOW, Starfleet is -- and describes itself as -- an exploration fleet that participates in war. That may seem weird relative to modern practices, but let's face it, that's hardly the weirdest thing Star Trek has ever asked us to believe.

But really, how hard is it to consider that Starfleet during it's hundred plus years of operation be able to change as necessary from a military to a non-military organization as the need arises?

That's just it: since neither their mission role nor their command structure would actually be affected, the change is totally unnecessary. There's nothing in Federation law that says "the organization that participates in war" HAS to be a military organization. Starfleet probably never became a formal military organization because they were able to fulfill that role without actually changing their legal status.

We know for a fact that if the Federation got desperate enough they WOULD change it, and Starfleet would look very different afterwards (as we see in "Yesterday's Enterprise"). But even in the Dominion War, the Federation's simply never been that desperate.

Strictly speaking, Starfleet doesn't operate a standing military organization, so their combat training is just one aspect of a VERY extensive curriculum.

Starfleet IS a standing military organization.

Not it isn't.

Starfleet is an exploration agency with adequate combat capabilities. IOW they are professional explorers who can also fight.

A standing military is a combat organization with adequate exploration capabilities. IOW, they are professional soldiers who can also explore.

That is a sufficiently large difference that two different TV series and now a major motion picture have explicitly spelled it out, even to the point that a Starfleet Admiral is willing to perform some rather extraordinary actions to convert Starfleet INTO a standing military organization -- something that, previously, it had never been before.

AFAIK, this is a problem that Starfleet seems to grapple with about once every forty to sixty years. They're perfectly happy saying "We're peaceful explorers! Yay!" then something scary shows up and the conversation becomes "Holy shit, we're gonna have to fight those guys... are we the military now?"

Stupid writers, nothing more. Kirk's Starfleet was explicitly the military. Then Roddenberry changed his mind, and Picard spewed that drivel, and we've been stuck with that nonsense ever since.

Stupid writers, nothing more. Kirk's Starfleet was explicitly the military. Then Roddenberry changed his mind, and Picard spewed that drivel, and we've been stuck with that nonsense ever since.

Yes, I realize that, but too much of Star Trek has depended on that underlying subtext that we're stuck with it, especially now that JJ Abrams has elected not to change it. So we need some coherent way to rationalize it in-universe.

My rationalization is that Starfleet wasn't created to BE a military and was never intended to be used as one, but because the hazardous nature of their exploration mission necessitates having have the best ships, the best technology and the most effective and versatile weapon systems, the federation basically conscripts them en masse whenever a fight breaks out.

Just to be clear: my PREFERENCE would be for Starfleet to play it straight, have it be evolved from the Air Force or a combination of Earth space programs (Roskosmos/NASA/Spaceguard etc) that got adopted by United Earth and then by the Federation as an expeditionary force chartered to locate new trade partners, new allies, new exploitable resources, etc. Alot would have to change for Starfleet to be depicted this way, though, and ST09 was on a trajectory in that direction until Scotty dropped the bomb on that idea in STID.

Which is why I don't believe that Starfleet has principal responsibility for the Federation's ground wars (seeing how it is, you know Starfleet, not Dirtfleet).

Then how come Starfleet troops are the principal ground soldiers in DS9's battle with the Dominion? And also the same troops that secure Earth in "Paradise Lost"?

Crazy Eddie wrote:

Also, I'm thinking the definition of "war" in the 23rd century may also be somewhat different than the rest of us expect. For example, it seems to be the case that flying around and blowing up other people's space ships is NOT generally considered an act of war (Hence Archer does this with surprising regularity without causing a diplomatic incident).

It would also depend on the time period and the nation states involved as well. A blanket statement is overly broad.

In Kirk's time there were occasions that blowing up a star ship could either start or prevent a war.

Crazy Eddie wrote:

Bashir's think tank apparently states that the Federation stands to loose up to a trillion lives if they aren't victorious over the Dominion. A war fought primarily in space wouldn't have those kinds of stakes;

Why not? Lose the defending space fleet and your planets are open to attack. The Dominion could easily wipe out a few planets to make an example to the rest of the subjugated worlds to not make any trouble.

Crazy Eddie wrote:

blssdwlf wrote:

How does that description not describe a military if it conducts war?

Because in the whole of American history, no one has ever said of the U.S. Navy "Our purpose is peaceful exploration,"

"On August 18, 1838, six United States Navy ships left Norfolk, Virginia on an expedition to the South Pacific.
...Being a peaceful expedition of discovery, the ships were stripped of heavy armament and its space was given over to scientific exploration. "

and no captain of CVN-65 was ever heard using terms similar to "The Navy is not a military organization, its purpose is exploration."

And I accept Picard's comment as it was applicable to his time (TNG) in that particular version of Starfleet.

Just like I accept the evidence that TOS/TOS Movie Starfleet was a military at that time in the past.

Crazy Eddie wrote:

But really, how hard is it to consider that Starfleet during it's hundred plus years of operation be able to change as necessary from a military to a non-military organization as the need arises?

That's just it: since neither their mission role nor their command structure would actually be affected, the change is totally unnecessary. There's nothing in Federation law that says "the organization that participates in war" HAS to be a military organization.

However, that's not how Starfleet is described in TOS and TOS Movies. We do have people like Carol and David Marcus calling Starfleet, "the military" and the Organians marking them as Military Forces.

Crazy Eddie wrote:

Starfleet probably never became a formal military organization because they were able to fulfill that role without actually changing their legal status.

I think that's an interesting shift - to bring in their "legal status". I'd suggest then that legally Starfleet in TOS up till "The Undiscovered Country" was their formal military that happens to have exploration and science programs. At the conclusion of the new treaty, the "mothballed Starfleet" would have been the military aspect and the remaining programs became the Starfleet as seen in TNG.

Crazy Eddie wrote:

We know for a fact that if the Federation got desperate enough they WOULD change it, and Starfleet would look very different afterwards (as we see in "Yesterday's Enterprise"). But even in the Dominion War, the Federation's simply never been that desperate.

They were at war for 20 years in "Yesterday's Enterprise". In "The Undiscovered Country", Starfleet was protecting the Federation against "almost 70 years of unremitting hostility" from the Klingons. There's plenty of room for the TOS Starfleet to be the military waiting for a war with the Klingons.

Crazy Eddie wrote:

Darkwing wrote:

Stupid writers, nothing more. Kirk's Starfleet was explicitly the military. Then Roddenberry changed his mind, and Picard spewed that drivel, and we've been stuck with that nonsense ever since.

Yes, I realize that, but too much of Star Trek has depended on that underlying subtext that we're stuck with it, especially now that JJ Abrams has elected not to change it.

Not really. JJ Abrams universe is not the same as TOS or the TOS Movies. One Starfleet went military and other didn't (and that works fine in-universe as the simplest explanation.)

Which is why I don't believe that Starfleet has principal responsibility for the Federation's ground wars (seeing how it is, you know Starfleet, not Dirtfleet).

Then how come Starfleet troops are the principal ground soldiers in DS9's battle with the Dominion?

They're not. They just get saddled with that duty at AR-558 because literally nobody else in the universe could be spared for that mission.

Why not? Lose the defending space fleet and your planets are open to attack. The Dominion could easily wipe out a few planets to make an example to the rest of the subjugated worlds to not make any trouble.

That still wouldn't add up to 900 billion casualties unless the Federation has a population in the tens of trillions. This suggests the majority population of the Federation is under threat, and that seems incredibly unlikely.

Besides, this is the Jem'hadar we're talking about. They will take ANY excuse to slaughter their enemies face-to-face. They don't need to actually defeat your defenses to beam down to your planet and start causing trouble, and they don't always bother to try.

I think that's an interesting shift - to bring in their "legal status". I'd suggest then that legally Starfleet in TOS up till "The Undiscovered Country" was their formal military that happens to have exploration and science programs. At the conclusion of the new treaty, the "mothballed Starfleet" would have been the military aspect and the remaining programs became the Starfleet as seen in TNG.

That would be inconsistent with the overall design of the Galaxy and Ambassador class starships which are considerably better armed than their smaller predecessors.

On the contrary, I think that Federation law doesn't actually establish a formal military organization and instead includes provisions to commandeer or conscript any agency, organization or individual within the Federation who has the equipment and capabilities they need.

It also needs to be remembered that the Dominion War is hardly typical of an armed conflict in terms of galactic affairs; after all, prior to DS9 the Battle of Wolf 359 seemed like a really huge deal to everyone and the Cardassian Border Wars were a fairly hot topic. Starfleet IS a military organization in the Yesterday's Enterprise alternate timeline, however -- this after more than 20 years of war with the Klingons -- and had the Dominion War dragged on another five or ten years the same probably would have happened in that case too. In both cases, it's mainly because the Federation never needed to formalize that status before; they had never been in a situation where they actually needed to fight a large multi-front war against a massive and powerful adversary.

They were at war for 20 years in "Yesterday's Enterprise". In "The Undiscovered Country", Starfleet was protecting the Federation against "almost 70 years of unremitting hostility" from the Klingons. There's plenty of room for the TOS Starfleet to be the military waiting for a war with the Klingons.

Theoretically that would also be the case in "Into Darkness" and Admiral Marcus is the kind of person who would have driven the military conversion had it been necessary.

But it WASN'T necessary. The Klingons and the Federation were in open warfare less than two days before the Organians cried foul and evidently never came to blows again before Praxis exploded. Obviously an undeclared cold war had been going on in the mean time, but that would still leave Starfleet in the position of an undeclared quasi-military who spends more time sneaking around monitoring them than actually shooting at them.

Crazy Eddie wrote:

Darkwing wrote:

Stupid writers, nothing more. Kirk's Starfleet was explicitly the military. Then Roddenberry changed his mind, and Picard spewed that drivel, and we've been stuck with that nonsense ever since.

Yes, I realize that, but too much of Star Trek has depended on that underlying subtext that we're stuck with it, especially now that JJ Abrams has elected not to change it.

Not really. JJ Abrams universe is not the same as TOS or the TOS Movies. One Starfleet went military and other didn't (and that works fine in-universe as the simplest explanation.)

I'm not so sure, actually. Starfleet's depiction in both movies is at least as militaristic as it is in TOS -- more so, IMO, for a number of reasons -- but is still DESCRIBED as being non-military by two different characters in STID.

It's not actually that hard to reconcile since Starfleet's non-military mission is sufficiently emphasized that they can get away with avoiding that classification. Actually, the only reason to assume it MUST be a military organization is the desire to cast the best possible light on the nature of military organizations, and that's just not something that would jibe very well with the fictional history of United Earth.

Which is why I don't believe that Starfleet has principal responsibility for the Federation's ground wars (seeing how it is, you know Starfleet, not Dirtfleet).

Then how come Starfleet troops are the principal ground soldiers in DS9's battle with the Dominion?

They're not. They just get saddled with that duty at AR-558 because literally nobody else in the universe could be spared for that mission.

Oh they very much are Starfleet.

VARGAS: According to Starfleet regulations we're suppose to be rotated off the front lines after ninety days.

Crazy Eddie wrote:

That still wouldn't add up to 900 billion casualties unless the Federation has a population in the tens of trillions. This suggests the majority population of the Federation is under threat, and that seems incredibly unlikely.

Looking at the episode again, the 900 billion casualties was from a prolonged war. 90 planets at 10 billion deaths (or some combination) seem reasonable as war can cause direct death or death through infrastructure collapse like starvation and disease. So, it's likely.

Crazy Eddie wrote:

Besides, this is the Jem'hadar we're talking about. They will take ANY excuse to slaughter their enemies face-to-face. They don't need to actually defeat your defenses to beam down to your planet and start causing trouble, and they don't always bother to try.

No, it's the Dominion which is directed by the Founders. The Jem'hedar aren't always going to be directed into ground combat.

Crazy Eddie wrote:

That would be inconsistent with the overall design of the Galaxy and Ambassador class starships which are considerably better armed than their smaller predecessors.

How are these ships better armed than their smaller predecessors during TNG? In the DS9 battles they do no additional damage than the other small ships. They might last longer due their size and bulk but there is no indication they were better armed.

Crazy Eddie wrote:

On the contrary, I think that Federation law doesn't actually establish a formal military organization and instead includes provisions to commandeer or conscript any agency, organization or individual within the Federation who has the equipment and capabilities they need.

Or Starfleet's military,science and exploration programs changed in priority as the need arises over the 100+ years of it's existence.

Crazy Eddie wrote:

It also needs to be remembered that the Dominion War is hardly typical of an armed conflict in terms of galactic affairs;

Well, it seemed pretty typical when you compare it to the brief Klingon-Cardassian War or possibly even the further back Federation-Klingon War in "Errand of Mercy". Fleets of ships deciding the fate of the warring nations.

Crazy Eddie wrote:

after all, prior to DS9 the Battle of Wolf 359 seemed like a really huge deal to everyone and the Cardassian Border Wars were a fairly hot topic.

Wouldn't it be a huge deal to the TNG Starfleet which at that time was squarely NOT a military? Wolf 359 and the Cardassian conflict would've been a strain on a service that was not geared for combat.

Crazy Eddie wrote:

Starfleet IS a military organization in the Yesterday's Enterprise alternate timeline, however -- this after more than 20 years of war with the Klingons -- and had the Dominion War dragged on another five or ten years the same probably would have happened in that case too. In both cases, it's mainly because the Federation never needed to formalize that status before; they had never been in a situation where they actually needed to fight a large multi-front war against a massive and powerful adversary.

They were in that situation in TOS when they started to fight the Klingons.

Crazy Eddie wrote:

Theoretically that would also be the case in "Into Darkness" and Admiral Marcus is the kind of person who would have driven the military conversion had it been necessary.

Well we do know that the two universes aren't alike. How the JJVerse Starfleet progresses doesn't bear on the TOS universe.

Crazy Eddie wrote:

But it WASN'T necessary. The Klingons and the Federation were in open warfare less than two days before the Organians cried foul and evidently never came to blows again before Praxis exploded. Obviously an undeclared cold war had been going on in the mean time, but that would still leave Starfleet in the position of an undeclared quasi-military who spends more time sneaking around monitoring them than actually shooting at them.

Even in cold wars you'd get a pretty good military build up. There wasn't any indication that either side reduced their wartime forces after the Organian treaty. The only time we hear of the Starfleet military standing down is in the events of "The Undiscovered Country".

Crazy Eddie wrote:

Crazy Eddie wrote:

Yes, I realize that, but too much of Star Trek has depended on that underlying subtext that we're stuck with it, especially now that JJ Abrams has elected not to change it.

Not really. JJ Abrams universe is not the same as TOS or the TOS Movies. One Starfleet went military and other didn't (and that works fine in-universe as the simplest explanation.)

I'm not so sure, actually. Starfleet's depiction in both movies is at least as militaristic as it is in TOS -- more so, IMO, for a number of reasons -- but is still DESCRIBED as being non-military by two different characters in STID.

I think when you pointed out that JJVerse Scotty said it wasn't a military that pretty much cemented a *different* path that was taken. TOS Scotty had no problems dropping a few photon torpedoes in the name of diplomacy or General 24'ing a planet in "A Taste of Armageddon" and he had no qualms in facing down Klingons in person or in space combat. JJVerse Scotty doesn't appear to have that same attitude.

Crazy Eddie wrote:

It's not actually that hard to reconcile since Starfleet's non-military mission is sufficiently emphasized that they can get away with avoiding that classification. Actually, the only reason to assume it MUST be a military organization is the desire to cast the best possible light on the nature of military organizations, and that's just not something that would jibe very well with the fictional history of United Earth.

Actually the only reason to believe Starfleet was a military in TOS/TOS Movies was because the characters said so and behaved as such. Seems simple enough

Then how come Starfleet troops are the principal ground soldiers in DS9's battle with the Dominion?

They're not. They just get saddled with that duty at AR-558 because literally nobody else in the universe could be spared for that mission.

Oh they very much are Starfleet.

Of course they are. They're just not the principle land army of the Federation.

No, it's the Dominion which is directed by the Founders. The Jem'hedar aren't always going to be directed into ground combat.

Not every or even most Jem'hadar ships have founders on board (it's not even clear they all have a Vorta). Even with that, the Jem'hadar are good at coming up with excuses for a land action even when orbital bombardment might well be feasible (it is, after all, why they are designed the way they are).

How are these ships better armed than their smaller predecessors during TNG? In the DS9 battles they do no additional damage than the other small ships.

The phaser arrays on the Galaxy class are far more advanced and supposedly more powerful than anything the fleet has ever used before. Moreover, the torpedo launcher on the galaxy class has a (seldom used) capacity to launch large volleys of torpedoes simultaneously -- up to six in a single shot -- while older/smaller designs have to make due with spreads of two to four at most. The Galaxy and Nebula classes also have much heavier shielding and far more raw power available than the Excelsiors or Mirandas could feasibly generate.

I'm not necessarily suggesting that all of those older designs are as obsolescent as the Stargazer seemed to be, but I also don't think they're that much better off.

Or Starfleet's military,science and exploration programs changed in priority as the need arises over the 100+ years of it's existence.

Both are possible, but it doesn't seem to me that Starfleet has EVER placed that high a priority on military readiness. Of particular interest is the testing of the M5 unit for compatibility with Starfleet systems; not just the battle drills were evaluated, but also the M5's capacity to conduct an exploration survey and manage/coordinate an away team.

This interests me because that doesn't seem to be the kind of test you would need to assign to a computer. M5 could be used to run unmanned combat vessels fairly easily, it wouldn't actually need to be in command of a ship with a scientific crew in the first place. A military-minded Starfleet would have deployed M5 (or a few of its predecessors) in the combat role first, and then asked Daystrom if he could adapt the M5 unit to the exploration program once its operational record had been established.

Testing M5 in both aspects at the same time suggests they wanted a computer intelligence that could perform starfleet's primary exploratory role without exposing the crew to risk from unexpected hostile attack, which is to say the intent was ALWAYS to have M5 coordinating with a (obviously much smaller than normal) science team. Even more interesting is the fact that combat is the only thing M5 can do entirely without any human input at all; had the experiment worked, Starfleet officers would never need to know anything about combat again, they could just strap themselves into a disaster shelter and wait for the computer to pwn their enemies.

As I said, it could go either way, but I just don't see Starfleet ever explicitly prioritizing combat readiness over science. Although partly this is because there's very rarely been a conflict between the two, the biggest issue is that Starfleet spends a lot more time and money on exploration than it does on combat operations and military maneuvers.

Well, it seemed pretty typical when you compare it to the brief Klingon-Cardassian War or possibly even the further back Federation-Klingon War in "Errand of Mercy". Fleets of ships deciding the fate of the warring nations.

Actually, they seemed to be deciding the fates of the contested colonies/worlds, but little else.

OTOH, the Klingon-Cardassian war is an unprecedented event in Cardassian history as well and represents an enormous bit of "Oh shit, the Klingons are expanding again!" badness for the entire universe. Compare it to the brief Klingon-Federation skirmish over Arkanis a few months later, or to the battles of Wolf 359 or the massacre at the Omarian Nebula. It seems to me that prior to the Dominion War a typical military conflict would involve at most 30 to 50 starships centered around a fairly limited local objective (a contested solar system or a particular planet in said system).

Wouldn't it be a huge deal to the TNG Starfleet which at that time was squarely NOT a military? Wolf 359 and the Cardassian conflict would've been a strain on a service that was not geared for combat.

Evidently, it WAS.

wlf, I'm starting to think that the only real difference between you and me is that you believe Starfleet geared up for combat prior to the Dominion War and BECAME a military organization while I believe that Starfleet did not formally BECOME a military organization and was therefore (still) woefully unprepared for the Domion when fighting finally broke out. Given another few years they probably would have hit the point of no return and restructured dramatically, but we didn't really see that happen in DS9; it would have been a pretty big deal, and not something that would have gone on in the background without a mention.

Although, I would concede one point: the uniform change just before the outbreak of war could be interpreted as an outward sign of an otherwise invisible restructuring, say, the issuing of a general order commanding all Starfleet personnel to mobilize all assets to "Indefinite Defensive Condition" or some similar concept that would, in essence, conscript the entire fleet en masse. I don't know that the new uniforms or any other changes were ever referenced in dialog, though, so it's tough to say if this was ever the case.

Crazy Eddie wrote:

I'm not so sure, actually. Starfleet's depiction in both movies is at least as militaristic as it is in TOS -- more so, IMO, for a number of reasons -- but is still DESCRIBED as being non-military by two different characters in STID.

I think when you pointed out that JJVerse Scotty said it wasn't a military that pretty much cemented a *different* path that was taken. TOS Scotty had no problems dropping a few photon torpedoes in the name of diplomacy or General 24'ing a planet in "A Taste of Armageddon"...

You mention that alot, but Scotty never actually did it and it's far from certain that he really would have if it came to it. For all we know, General Order 24 is an inside joke (like "Kobyashi Maru") which roughly means "Bluff your ass off because the enemy doesn't know us that well."

Personally, I believe Starfleet IS and ALWAYS HAS BEEN a military, albeit one that in the 24th century has lost a lot of it's resolve AS a military, due to political correctness in-universe and (especially) meta-universe.

They're not. They just get saddled with that duty at AR-558 because literally nobody else in the universe could be spared for that mission.

Oh they very much are Starfleet.

Of course they are. They're just not the principle land army of the Federation.

So what does this land army look like? The only one we've seen in the various land battles are Starfleet guys.

Crazy Eddie wrote:

Not every or even most Jem'hadar ships have founders on board (it's not even clear they all have a Vorta). Even with that, the Jem'hadar are good at coming up with excuses for a land action even when orbital bombardment might well be feasible (it is, after all, why they are designed the way they are).

If the Vorta or Founders ordered Jem'hedar ships to bombard and destroy their targets they will do so.

Crazy Eddie wrote:

The phaser arrays on the Galaxy class are far more advanced and supposedly more powerful than anything the fleet has ever used before. Moreover, the torpedo launcher on the galaxy class has a (seldom used) capacity to launch large volleys of torpedoes simultaneously -- up to six in a single shot -- while older/smaller designs have to make due with spreads of two to four at most.

If it came down to firing more simultaneous torpedoes giving the firing ship an advantage you'd think the E-E would have that same capability. The phasers on Galaxy-class ships didn't appear to be any more effective against same type targets when you compare them to the smaller/older designs as seen in the DS9 battles.

Crazy Eddie wrote:

The Galaxy and Nebula classes also have much heavier shielding and far more raw power available than the Excelsiors or Mirandas could feasibly generate.

I don't think they have heavier shielding (see Battle of Chintoka) or raw power (which would give them a phaser output advantage) as DS9 battles don't appear to give them an edge.

Now they do have more bulk to be destroyed though

Crazy Eddie wrote:

Both are possible, but it doesn't seem to me that Starfleet has EVER placed that high a priority on military readiness. Of particular interest is the testing of the M5 unit for compatibility with Starfleet systems; not just the battle drills were evaluated, but also the M5's capacity to conduct an exploration survey and manage/coordinate an away team.

The live exercises involved a surprise attack and a fleet action in addition to the exploration and navigation. If military readiness wasn't a high priority I doubt they'd draw off *five* starships into a wargame.

Crazy Eddie wrote:

This interests me because that doesn't seem to be the kind of test you would need to assign to a computer. M5 could be used to run unmanned combat vessels fairly easily, it wouldn't actually need to be in command of a ship with a scientific crew in the first place. A military-minded Starfleet would have deployed M5 (or a few of its predecessors) in the combat role first, and then asked Daystrom if he could adapt the M5 unit to the exploration program once its operational record had been established.

I'd argue that the M5 unit wasn't going for just use in wartime but also in peacetime as well. Otherwise, M5 and all the ships that it commanded would be mothballed during peacetime. (And that would seem to be a waste of resources.)

Crazy Eddie wrote:

Actually, they seemed to be deciding the fates of the contested colonies/worlds, but little else.

If the Klingons caught what was left of the Cardassian government in that space battle it would've been a different fate for their short war.

Crazy Eddie wrote:

OTOH, the Klingon-Cardassian war is an unprecedented event in Cardassian history as well and represents an enormous bit of "Oh shit, the Klingons are expanding again!" badness for the entire universe.

The Klingons were going after the Cardassians because they believed the Founders had infiltrated their government. They were going to use that as an excuse to take their territory and eliminate the Dominion influence all in one war.

Crazy Eddie wrote:

Compare it to the brief Klingon-Federation skirmish over Arkanis a few months later, or to the battles of Wolf 359 or the massacre at the Omarian Nebula. It seems to me that prior to the Dominion War a typical military conflict would involve at most 30 to 50 starships centered around a fairly limited local objective (a contested solar system or a particular planet in said system).

Considering that Starfleet (and probably the Klingons) mothballed their military after "The Undiscovered Country" it would mean any military conflicts all the way to TNG would not be an all-out war and just limited-force engagements.

Crazy Eddie wrote:

Evidently, it WAS.

Which is why I agree that to the non-Military Starfleet during TNG would've been a big deal. But that would not be the case in TOS Starfleet which was mobilized for war as a military.

Crazy Eddie wrote:

wlf, I'm starting to think that the only real difference between you and me is that you believe Starfleet geared up for combat prior to the Dominion War and BECAME a military organization while I believe that Starfleet did not formally BECOME a military organization and was therefore (still) woefully unprepared for the Domion when fighting finally broke out. Given another few years they probably would have hit the point of no return and restructured dramatically, but we didn't really see that happen in DS9; it would have been a pretty big deal, and not something that would have gone on in the background without a mention.

I don't have exactly the same view, but I do believe that Starfleet went full military during the Dominion War. Sisko and Nog both spoke of themselves as soldiers and troops. What they did do was prevent the Military (Starfleet) from usurping power over the civilian Federation government.

Crazy Eddie wrote:

You mention that alot, but Scotty never actually did it and it's far from certain that he really would have if it came to it. For all we know, General Order 24 is an inside joke (like "Kobyashi Maru") which roughly means "Bluff your ass off because the enemy doesn't know us that well."

"A Taste of Armageddon" didn't give any indication that a bluff was being used at all. This is unlike any of the other episodes where we are told or can tell that it is a bluff like "Corbomite".

Realistically -- as in, consistent with what Star Trek has shown us in the past -- most likely a combination of the MACOs and the Andorian Royal Guard updated with 24th century technology. The absence of the Andorians in significant numbers in the Dominion War is otherwise too suspicious to be explained away by the writers simply forgetting they exist; in TOS they were described as a "warrior race" whose volatile natures are only barely checked by enlightened self interest. In the same way that Starfleet seems to be dominated by humans (having a cultural affinity for peaceful exploration and bridge-building anyway), the Federation's ground forces are almost certainly dominated by Andorians, whom we later discover are notoriously militaristic and even have ritualistic hand-to-hand combat rites to settle certain disputes.

IOW: we never saw the Federation's principle land army in the same way (and probably for the same reason) that we never saw a SINGLE Andorian in all of TNG or DS9.

That's not to say that's the way things SHOULD have gone done. Ideally -- as in, consistent with what Star Trek could/should have shown us based on the 24th century's level of technology -- a Federation ground army would probably look a lot like these guys.

If the Vorta or Founders ordered Jem'hedar ships to bombard and destroy their targets they will do so.

I doubt that they'd bother ordering it. The Jem'hadar are both completely disposable and EXTREMELY effective in ground combat. Forcing the Federation to commit resources to a land action would be advantageous from a morale, strategic and political standpoint, and also would be a lot more fun for the Jem'hadar.

If it came down to firing more simultaneous torpedoes giving the firing ship an advantage you'd think the E-E would have that same capability.

Theoretically, it DID. Enterprise-E originally had five torpedo launchers to the E-D's three, and backstage sources claimed each of those launchers could fire a volley of six torpedoes on their own. The Nemesis retrofit added four additional torpedo tubes to the ship which probably can only fire individually but at least one is seen firing clusters of three at the Scimitar.

I don't think they have heavier shielding (see Battle of Chintoka) or raw power (which would give them a phaser output advantage) as DS9 battles don't appear to give them an edge.

DS9 battles don't appear to give them any SHIELDING either. YMMV.

The live exercises involved a surprise attack and a fleet action in addition to the exploration and navigation. If military readiness wasn't a high priority I doubt they'd draw off *five* starships into a wargame.

If military readiness was a high priority, they wouldn't have drawn ANY. They would have tested M5 on an unmanned platform first and evaluated its performance in conjunction with normal starship operations so as not to divert fleet resources away from their regular patrol duties (basically, how the Navy's been testing the QF-47 prototypes).

I'd argue that the M5 unit wasn't going for just use in wartime but also in peacetime as well. Otherwise, M5 and all the ships that it commanded would be mothballed during peacetime. (And that would seem to be a waste of resources.)

That's kind of my overall point about Starfleet, though. The reason they don't classify it as a military organization is because military organizations are hard to justify -- politically and monetarily -- in peace time. An exploration fleet is probably easier, especially in a culture where aggressive space exploration is a lot more popular politically than aggressive militarism. The defense establishment of the Federation would simply see this as a relationship of convenience: they'll never convince anyone to fund the kind of military the Federation needs, but they CAN convince Starfleet to make itself prepared to step into that role if and when it becomes necessary to do so.

That leaves open for debate to what extent that role is necessary and how important it really is to Starfleet in the first place. You'd have a wide range of opinions among various officers and commands, depending on what's going on in the world and their own point of view. But that range of opinions can only exist where Starfleet's official status is TECHNICALLY not a military one.

IOW, the debate we're having right now probably mirrors the debate with Starfleet's own command structure. Different sides probably have more influence year after year, depending on current events, but there's never a solid consensus one way or the other.

The Klingons were going after the Cardassians because they believed the Founders had infiltrated their government. They were going to use that as an excuse to take their territory and eliminate the Dominion influence all in one war.

Actually, they were using that as an excuse to re-embrace the kind of imperialistic militarism that originally made them enemies of the Federation a hundred years earlier. That was the whole issue with Gowron trying to take the Klingons back to "the old ways."

Which is why I agree that to the non-Military Starfleet during TNG would've been a big deal. But that would not be the case in TOS Starfleet which was mobilized for war as a military.

I'm sure the TOS fleet mobilized for a limited war over the Arkanis sector (as the TNG fleet did just prior to the Dominion War) but for reasons outlined above I am less sure that this makes them a military organization. More militaristic, sure, but that's a different issue altogether.

"A Taste of Armageddon" didn't give any indication that a bluff was being used at all. This is unlike any of the other episodes where we are told or can tell that it is a bluff like "Corbomite".

The only reason we know Corbomite was a bluff is because they were all laughing their asses off that it ended up working (because Kirk had literally made it up right that minute). Kirk used the same bluff against the Romulans in "The Deadly Years" where it was slightly less obvious that he was yanking their collective chains.

General Order 24 as a "insider's reference" would be a lot more consistent with what we know about Kirk (and actually, Starfleet) than it would with their willingness to glass entire planets just because they don't get their way. It would, for example, mirror Spock's "in plain sight" coding of their communications in TWOK: "If we went by the book -- like Lieutenant Saavik -- hours would seem like days."

Kirk calling Scotty about General Order 24 would probably reflect some specific scenario in the academy simulators; say, a way to resolve hostage situations by convincing the hostage takers that your orbiting ship is about five minutes away from glassing the whole planet because the hostage takers don't know enough about Starfleet to chance this being a ruse. It would work ESPECIALLY well on the Eminians, who have apparently concocted this entire computer-controlled war system purely to avoid damaging their cities and cultural heritage; the threat of a starship raining uncontrolled destruction on them would have been terrifying on multiple levels.

That's kind of my overall point about Starfleet, though. The reason they don't classify it as a military organization is because military organizations are hard to justify -- politically and monetarily -- in peace time. An exploration fleet is probably easier, especially in a culture where aggressive space exploration is a lot more popular politically than aggressive militarism. The defense establishment of the Federation would simply see this as a relationship of convenience: they'll never convince anyone to fund the kind of military the Federation needs, but they CAN convince Starfleet to make itself prepared to step into that role if and when it becomes necessary to do so.

I've rarely seen any politician who needed to be convinced that we need a military, even in peacetime. The confusion only seems to come from idiots thinking that winning a war means we should drastically cut (always too much) the military to create a "peace dividend" that always comes back to haunt us. And we've never seen Starfleet do anything non-military.

That leaves open for debate to what extent that role is necessary and how important it really is to Starfleet in the first place. You'd have a wide range of opinions among various officers and commands, depending on what's going on in the world and their own point of view. But that range of opinions can only exist where Starfleet's official status is TECHNICALLY not a military one.

Now that is not only untrue, but makes no sense, either. We have a wide range of opinion now, and all that being in the military means is that we must be cautious in how we express it in order to avoid the appearance of military endorsement of any particular viewpoint.

IOW, the debate we're having right now probably mirrors the debate with Starfleet's own command structure. Different sides probably have more influence year after year, depending on current events, but there's never a solid consensus one way or the other.

More likely, the pacifist bloc of the council, the hawks, and the politicians and talking heads associated with both sides. And those officers foolish enough to buy the rhetoric.

Realistically -- as in, consistent with what Star Trek has shown us in the past -- most likely a combination of the MACOs and the Andorian Royal Guard updated with 24th century technology.

The MACOs and Andorians on Enterprise were part of an early Starfleet that went through many changes. It didn't look or act like TOS Starfleet just like TOS Starfleet doesn't look or act like TNG Starfleet.

If there were separate DS9 Starfleet Military guys you would think we would've seen them in the ground combat scenarios?

And if we're going on the military ranks of the MACOs which consisted of ground forces-type ranks then Colonel West of Starfleet would equate to the Military. This would indicate by TOS the Military was integrated into and synonymous with Starfleet. (And that tallies nicely with Carol and David Marcus calling Starfleet the Military.)

Crazy Eddie wrote:

The absence of the Andorians in significant numbers in the Dominion War is otherwise too suspicious to be explained away by the writers simply forgetting they exist;

It might be more beneficial to your argument if you addressed the absence of MACOs before the Andorians.

Crazy Eddie wrote:

That's not to say that's the way things SHOULD have gone done. Ideally -- as in, consistent with what Star Trek could/should have shown us based on the 24th century's level of technology -- a Federation ground army would probably look a lot like these guys.

Perhaps. Although 24th century tech might be more compact and involving portable shields and combat drones.

Crazy Eddie wrote:

If the Vorta or Founders ordered Jem'hedar ships to bombard and destroy their targets they will do so.

I doubt that they'd bother ordering it. The Jem'hadar are both completely disposable and EXTREMELY effective in ground combat. Forcing the Federation to commit resources to a land action would be advantageous from a morale, strategic and political standpoint, and also would be a lot more fun for the Jem'hadar.

Well in "What You Leave Behind" in short order the Dominion caused 800 million casualties. It would appear regardless on how they do it they can be ordered to wipe out whole planets. Billions would not be an issue.

Crazy Eddie wrote:

Theoretically, it DID. Enterprise-E originally had five torpedo launchers to the E-D's three, and backstage sources claimed each of those launchers could fire a volley of six torpedoes on their own. The Nemesis retrofit added four additional torpedo tubes to the ship which probably can only fire individually but at least one is seen firing clusters of three at the Scimitar.

A single volley of 3 still is a step back from the 6 at a time that the E-D could manage.

Crazy Eddie wrote:

DS9 battles don't appear to give them any SHIELDING either. YMMV.

Or they could be running conformal shields

Crazy Eddie wrote:

If military readiness was a high priority, they wouldn't have drawn ANY. They would have tested M5 on an unmanned platform first and evaluated its performance in conjunction with normal starship operations so as not to divert fleet resources away from their regular patrol duties (basically, how the Navy's been testing the QF-47 prototypes).

Since they were doing live wargames it would make sense that they used actual ships rather than drones. Firing low-power phasers for the wargame makes sense as it has the exact same performance and need not be simulated. It makes sense that a military wargame would want to be as realistic as possible and this would indicate the testing was beyond using unmanned drones and such.

Crazy Eddie wrote:

That's kind of my overall point about Starfleet, though. The reason they don't classify it as a military organization is because military organizations are hard to justify -- politically and monetarily -- in peace time.

If your point was more specific to periods of peace time then I wouldn't be debating you However since you lump the entirety of Starfleet's existence into a non-military organization then that's where you took it too broadly.

TOS and TOS Movies point to a Starfleet as The Military. TNG and ENT does not. DS9 they went military during the war. AbramsTrek stayed non-Military.

Crazy Eddie wrote:

But that range of opinions can only exist where Starfleet's official status is TECHNICALLY not a military one.

Its not a range of opinions but statements at different points in time. TOS/TOS Movies had dialogue calling Starfleet, "The Military". TNG had dialogue calling Starfleet a non-military. That indicates Starfleet's organization and role changes back and forth over time.

Crazy Eddie wrote:

Which is why I agree that to the non-Military Starfleet during TNG would've been a big deal. But that would not be the case in TOS Starfleet which was mobilized for war as a military.

I'm sure the TOS fleet mobilized for a limited war over the Arkanis sector (as the TNG fleet did just prior to the Dominion War) but for reasons outlined above I am less sure that this makes them a military organization. More militaristic, sure, but that's a different issue altogether.

When Starfleet in "Wrath of Khan" is referred to as "The Military" it leaves little room to argue that they are not the military in TOS. This is the same as Picard's "Starfleet is not a military" statement in TNG.

Crazy Eddie wrote:

"A Taste of Armageddon" didn't give any indication that a bluff was being used at all. This is unlike any of the other episodes where we are told or can tell that it is a bluff like "Corbomite".

The only reason we know Corbomite was a bluff is because they were all laughing their asses off that it ended up working (because Kirk had literally made it up right that minute). Kirk used the same bluff against the Romulans in "The Deadly Years" where it was slightly less obvious that he was yanking their collective chains.

The dialogue and scene in "The Corbomite Maneuver" spelled out that it was a bluff. The use of Corbomite in "The Deadly Years" was a nice bit of continuity and used as a bluff with supporting dialogue.

Crazy Eddie wrote:

General Order 24 as a "insider's reference" would be a lot more consistent with what we know about Kirk (and actually, Starfleet) than it would with their willingness to glass entire planets just because they don't get their way. It would, for example, mirror Spock's "in plain sight" coding of their communications in TWOK: "If we went by the book -- like Lieutenant Saavik -- hours would seem like days."

And Spock and Saavik discuss their deception so we know that it was code. This does not occur in "A Taste of Armageddon".

Crazy Eddie wrote:

Kirk calling Scotty about General Order 24 would probably reflect some specific scenario in the academy simulators; say, a way to resolve hostage situations by convincing the hostage takers that your orbiting ship is about five minutes away from glassing the whole planet because the hostage takers don't know enough about Starfleet to chance this being a ruse. It would work ESPECIALLY well on the Eminians, who have apparently concocted this entire computer-controlled war system purely to avoid damaging their cities and cultural heritage; the threat of a starship raining uncontrolled destruction on them would have been terrifying on multiple levels.

Unlike the other bluffs and tricks that Kirk did in other episodes this had no indication that it was one at any time. Even when Kirk and Spock had secured the room Kirk's order to Scotty was to follow through with it if something should happen.

If there were separate DS9 Starfleet Military guys you would think we would've seen them in the ground combat scenarios?

No.

Because since all of the main characters are Starfleet, the only time we ever see ground combat is when Starfleet is sent to do it. Which is, apparently, an INCREDIBLY rare occurrence.

But I could ask the same question: If the Andorians are still members of the Federation, you would think we would've seen them... EVER?

Like I said, the two absences are probably related.

And if we're going on the military ranks of the MACOs which consisted of ground forces-type ranks then Colonel West of Starfleet would equate to the Military.

That or Colonel West is the MACO liaison to Starfleet. It would explain why he is one of exactly two Starfleet officers we have ever seen to ever be referred to by that rank (the other being Kira Nerys, who served on DS9 in a similar capacity between Starfleet and the Bajoran Military).

It might be more beneficial to your argument if you addressed the absence of MACOs before the Andorians.

I'm not sure the two are unrelated. Starfleet, after all, is dominated by humans; it's likely, based on what we know of the Federation, that MACO is dominated by Andorians.

Perhaps. Although 24th century tech might be more compact and involving portable shields and combat drones.

That's kinda what I meant.

Since they were doing live wargames it would make sense that they used actual ships rather than drones. Firing low-power phasers for the wargame makes sense as it has the exact same performance and need not be simulated. It makes sense that a military wargame would want to be as realistic as possible and this would indicate the testing was beyond using unmanned drones and such.

But it doesn't appear they actually tested it with drones at all, in fact by all accounts this was the first time M5 had ever been used in the field.

My basic point is that a military organization wouldn't take five of its ships away from their patrol duties for an experiment like this unless all five of those ships were also testing some vital new system and/or training their crews in some specific scenario, as the Navy does with the Top Gun school and the Air Force does with Red Flag. It's almost unheard of, in those cases, for an entire squadron to be pulled off of active duty JUST to run mock engagements against a UAV or to test a new weapon system.

IOW, military readiness precludes that level of advanced field testing; M5 would have had his first trials in a Starfleet proving ground, probably retrofitted to a training vessel or a smaller starship that was not scheduled for deployment in the immediate future. The "wargames" would have occurred later, with a fully-tested and fully-operational M5 unit that had already demonstrated basic operational capacity in the proving ground, in which case it wouldn't be a test of the M5 so much as a genuine war game to see how the M5 would perform under more realistic wartime conditions.

If your point was more specific to periods of peace time then I wouldn't be debating you However since you lump the entirety of Starfleet's existence into a non-military organization then that's where you took it too broadly.

I doubt it even makes a difference. You, like many people, assume that ONLY a military organization could participate in combat or a full-scale (declared or otherwise) war, and that Starfleet would not have participated unless the declaration of its new status had been made.

This assumption has no factual support, though, and is already contradicted by real-world historical precedent as well as the in-universe precedent established by Earth Starfleet a century earlier. Starfleet need not be codified as a military organization to act in that role, especially if such precedent already exists in interstellar law (which it obviously does, given that many races -- the Vulcans, for example -- do not overtly differentiate between their armed and unarmed services).

Basically, organizations do not casually "go military" and then just as casually cease to be the military just because of politics at the time. Starfleet swings back and forth between being more or less militaristic, to be sure, but "the military" is a legal as well as political definition and is not an institutional label that can be assigned temporarily or conveniently.

It's a bit like "the police." The neighborhood watch is NOT a police force despite the fact that they often work with the police to help solve crimes and keep neighborhoods safe. In the event of a riot, the neighborhood watch may go out in force to protect their neighborhoods and help police officers keep track of what's going on, and the police may even deputize the neighborhood watch en masse to help stem the violence. But even deputized, the neighborhood watch never BECOMES a police force; before, during and after the riots they have no legal standing as peace officers, despite their temporary operational mandate to assist in the enforcement of the law.

What I meant by "becoming military" would be a fundamental shift in Starfleet's basic priorities by a legislative act of the Federation council, granting Starfleet a wider range of defense responsibilities and privileges, not least of which is the capacity to directly protect military secrets. This is a capacity that Starfleet does not actually have, as we learn in "The Drumhead", and can be inferred from from TOS through DS9 that the concept of "classified technology" isn't one Starfleet actually maintains beyond a very strong and logical preference NOT to let enemy governments access their technology. Moreover, the militarization of Starfleet wouldn't just change their legal powers and authorities, it would have to establish a new set of regulations and directives that would amend Starfleet's charter and altering its mission statement to:"To maintain, train and equip combat-ready Starfleet forces capable of winning wars, deterring aggression and maintaining freedom of space."

It would, in other words, be the redefinition under Federation law of what Starfleet actually is. They would cease to be an exploration agency; they would never be an exploration agency again. They might still do some exploring, they might still conduct scientific research, but that would no longer be their PURPOSE or their priority or even their way of doing business.

When Starfleet in "Wrath of Khan" is referred to as "The Military"

And referred to incorrectly by an impulsive brat with daddy issues. We've been over this before.